<p>SarahsDad, You make the following statement: "Why would WUSTL withold their data unless there's something fishy with the numbers?" </p>
<p>in order to participate in an initiative like CDS's one any college would have to make a commitment to prepare the data. That can be very expensive process (it might take a dedicated headcount - let us say 50K a year - the data would need to be submitted annually). Some data might not be even tracked in whetever systems WustL is using for admission tracking - in that case system changes might be required that can cost anything you could imagine - easily 200-300K for any significant change).</p>
<p>Now, when you decide to spend the money you should be able to see the benefits for your business, right ? Most likely WashU did not see enough benefits to justify this initial and ongoing investments (at least not at the moment). They might have decided to use the money instead for a scholarship, new event to benefit the students, etc.</p>
<p>WUSTL's endowment is 4+BILLION but is concerned about the cost? What about the cost of the negative publicity of not releasing this information?</p>
<p>Don't blame me for the negative spin here - I'm still a newbie - there's tons of posts on CC that mirror the same concerns I have.</p>
<p>It is amazing - "there's tons of posts on CC that mirror the same concerns I have". For people that have no connection with WashU (student - future student - alum - parent) - why is it such an obsession for these posters. Why do they care? As for "What about the cost of the negative publicity of not releasing this information?" - does not seem to have had a negative impact on the number or quality of the kids applying to or deciding to attend WashU.</p>
<p>Obviously WashU is happy, the students are happy, the alums and parents are happy - why is it that people on the outside looking in are obsesssed with WashU. It is a private school - the administration runs it the best way they see fit - they keep improving the facilities every year - they have made major upgrades to the faculty over the past few years (major new hires in Economics, Engineering and Business School) - the quality of the student body is among the best in the nation. WashU is making all the right decisions - don't know what else some of these posters want. As I stated above, it appears that the decisions are being made for the benefit of people directly associated with WashU (students etc.) not for to please CC posters.</p>
<p>ST2...it's all the people waitlisted and their anger at how they believe they were fooled by all the literature and "wooing" of people with their stats.It's like Wash. U was jumping up and down yelling "come here, come here, come here" and when you finally say "okay, you have convinced me" they say "oops, maybe we don't want you after all but then again maybe we do"
No one likes to be treated like that.</p>
<p>And how about all that money they are raking in on applications fee's?</p>
<p>It just makes me wonder... if other colleges are able to gauge the yield, why can't WUStL? And if there is over-enrollment, then why not just change the infrastructure (with the billions of dollars they have) to accommodate these highly qualified students? Was there an overabundance of 500 students within the last year, and so they're reacting to it now? Or has it been going on for a while, and they just suddenly decided to act?</p>
<p>I think some people are jumping on WUStL because they've seen their admissions practices in action -- the whole "I received 2309385 emails and letters from them" and then "accept few, waitlist everyone else" thing.</p>
<p>No one in my school applied to WashU this year. And all the past years, the ones that have applied and gotten in and decided not to go. So no, I don't know if I would have gotten in or not, but I have a strong feeling just about anyone from my school could.</p>
<p>We are bashing WashU because it seems more like a business than any other college. Why would people talk about them manipulating the rankings if there was nothing wrong? Why dont we talk abut JHU or Northwestern manipulating thier rankings? (which they don't)</p>
<p>Because there is something wrong, people don't just pick a random college and say "Whoa, we have to bash WasU because it sounds funny!"</p>
<p>Frankly, people do care about the rankings, ALOT of people. WashU is just way too high and is an embarrasment to the elite community.</p>
<p>
[quote]
in order to participate in an initiative like CDS's one any college would have to make a commitment to prepare the data. That can be very expensive process (it might take a dedicated headcount - let us say 50K a year - the data would need to be submitted annually) Now, when you decide to spend the money you should be able to see the benefits for your business, right ? Most likely WashU did not see enough benefits to justify this initial and ongoing investments (at least not at the moment). They might have decided to use the money instead for a scholarship, new event to benefit the students, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Please. Now who is being naive here? </p>
<p>That $50K or $100K is worth 10 times - heck 100 times - its weight in gold if it would put all of these question about number manipulation to bed. The fact that WashU still chooses NOT to in the face of all of this criticism speaks VOLUMES.</p>
<p>But I guess when you "grow up your employer will empower you to organize or manage anything more than shoes in your closet" and then "you might realize that in real life sometimes organizations do what they must to put themselves in the best light possible."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Brand, I assume you go there. Don't defend your college so vigoriously, its embarrassing
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You assume too much: I do not go there. You spend a lot of time bashing WashU while I am merely presenting a possible reason for WashU's actions. I have already acknowledeged that WashU focuses strongly on rankings, but as an admitted transfer student that will not receive a place on campus (like so many other transfers and upperclassmen that are being forced off campus), I think they should take action.</p>
<p>And for the record, I don't appreciate your offensive comments when I said nothing that implies I am "defending my college **vigorously<a href="yep,%20that's%20how%20you%20spell%20it%20;">/b</a>). </p>
<p>
[quote]
Many, including norcalguy and I and I expect other posters already in this thread, would have had no trouble at all gaining admission at Wash U.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>HAH! Ok. Tell that to the thousands of excellent applicants that got waitlisted/rejected. Come now, if you're going to insult others, don't make it so blatantly obvious!</p>
<p>
[quote]
WashU is just way too high and is an embarrasment to the elite community.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Heh. Alright, well have fun at Vandy then. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>On the note of the CDS, I find it very strange that WashU is one of the only top schools that does not post it. If they aren't hiding anything, they certainly know how to invoke suspicion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
WashU is way too high and is an embarrassment to the elite community
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a ridiculous statement even for a high school student to make. By every measure, the WashU student body is among the best in the country: SAT scores, percent in the top 10 percent of their class, numbers of Rhodes scholars, numbers of Truman scholars, etc. The faculty is distinguished, with credentials from the top universities, including the (genuflect for a moment) Ivy League. You can criticize admissions or business decisions, but there is no question that Washington University students and professors are respected among peer institutions and to say otherwise is just puerile nonsense.</p>
<p>WashU is up in rankings because of its endowment, mainly. That's helped it in many things used to rank colleges in the US News ranking. Honestly, does anyone really think that Emory should be ranked ahead of Berkeley or UMich? Starting out funded by Coca Cola can go a long way, though obviously not in top programs. Anyway, this is simply an example of how endowment-centric US News' rankings are, rather than education-centric.</p>
<p>Wow brand, making fun of spelling now? Now I know you have nothing to say.</p>
<p>And for the record, I am going to Dartmouth. And I did get into Vandy and would pick it over that joke WashU any day of the week (along with the rest of the country).</p>
<p>You applied as a transfer and got in? So you are defending "your" college.</p>
<p>
[quote]
By every measure, the WashU student body is among the best in the country
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But it sure can be hard work getting there though, huh? (its amazing what number manipulation, yield protection and selective disclosure can get you)</p>
<p>
[quote]
And for the record, I am going to Dartmouth
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hopefully they can teach you how to form unbiased, meaningful arguments.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You applied as a transfer and got in? So you are defending "your" college.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The fact that I was accepted as a transfer does not imply that I am attending; I have no reason to defend WashU. Look back through the WashU forum and you'll notice that I've started several threads criticizing the school for various things that I felt were handled incorrectly, including its use of the waitlist.</p>
<p>What is the point of slandering (and yes, that is what I shall term this) Washington University? The school may do as it pleases. If it feels that it needs to increase its rankings, which I don't think is the motive behind the cut, then so what? As long as you aren't attending (I'm assuming that a future student would defend rather than attack), it doesn't concern you.</p>
<p>I suppose you could say that I'm biased, seeing as it is my father's alma mater. I don't feel that I am, however.</p>
<p>Their decision will effect so many people. It'll effect every senior next year that is going to apply to Washington University, and thats about what, 20,000 people? Hardly nobody.</p>
<p>I am indeed biased (I go there), but the move to cut students can only be good. My freshman class is way overenrolled, and it's easy to notice this-- the food lines are always too long, among other things. Everyone I talked to thought it was a really good idea to decrease the size by 500. It's not a conspiracy to move the school up in USNews. It's a solution to a very real problem that has been affecting the university's ability to house everyone who wants to live on campus. Moreover, there isn't anywhere for WashU to expand that makes much sense. It's not as easy as just buying land.</p>
<p>I think there are several things that WashU needs to improve, and as a student I'm more irritated than someone like SweetLax could ever be (because after all, he's not going here). But in the end, I love it here. I turned down an excellent financial offer from Duke to attend; I didn't even apply to the Ivies. I guarantee that if you asked an array of WashU students, a vast majority would say they love it. It's not that we've been hoodwinked or tricked into enjoying it. My classes are excellent, and there are a lot of great departments. I know plenty of people who turned down Ivies (e.g., Harvard) to attend.</p>
<p>Keep that in mind before you slander the entire university for some of the admission department's tactics. They're not representative of what WashU really is: a warm, friendly Midwestern university.</p>
<p>Some really informed posts. "WashU is up in rankings because of its endowment, mainly." Last time I looked "Financial resources counted for only 10% of the ranking in US News.</p>
<p>SweetLax88 the statement "but I have a strong feeling just about anyone from my school could." is so ridiculous that it does not even deserve a comment. Even for a HS student.</p>
<p>sax "it's all the people waitlisted and their anger at how they believe they were fooled by all the literature and "wooing" of people with their stats." Welcome to America. It is about marketing your product. Happens every day when I check my mailbox, watch TV, listen to the radio. Just because I see or hear the advertising does not mean I have to buy the product. But at least I have an opportunity to see what is available. Present a product - the recipient then has free will to either participate or not.</p>
<p>As for student body - seems like by SAT and % in top 10% of their HS class - WashU does more than hold its own:
School SAT (average mid 50 percentile) % HS Top 10%</p>
<p>To understand any college's decision to reduce enrollment, it's important to know that everything in college finances is driven by:</p>
<p>PER STUDENT ENDOWMENT</p>
<p>It's an unusual business because the revenues from each student do not cover the cost of educating that that student. Therefore, each additional student undermines the financial strength of the school. Capping enrollment and raising the per student endowment strengthens the school, allowing things like a fewer students per professor, etc.</p>
<p>SweetLax88 - You may hate reported numbers - but that is what is reported by the schools. Obviously people do get into Columbia and Duke with SATs below 1330. (Duke 1330-1530; Columbia 1330-1540) Don't see any reason for Columbia or Duke to lie about their numbers. It just seems you prefer hear say or unsubstantiated opinion over facts and figures.</p>